Literature DB >> 17536703

Contrasting natural experiments confirm competition between House Finches and House Sparrows.

Caren B Cooper1, Wesley M Hochachka, André A Dhondt.   

Abstract

After House Finches were introduced from the western to the eastern United States and rapidly increased in numbers, House Sparrows declined, leading to suggestions that the decline was caused by interspecific competition. However, other potential causes were not excluded. The rapid decline in House Finches following the emergence of a new disease (mycoplasmal conjunctivitis) caused by a novel strain of Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG) in 1994 has provided a natural experiment and an opportunity to revisit the hypothesis that interspecific competition from House Finches drives population changes in House Sparrows. If true, the recent decline in House Finches should lead to an increase in House Sparrows. In this paper we test the hypothesis that House Sparrow and House Finch numbers in the northeastern United States vary inversely by examining data from three independent volunteer programs that monitor bird species' abundance and distribution (Christmas Bird Count, Project FeederWatch, and Breeding Bird Survey). In the first analysis we found that House Sparrow and House Finch numbers varied inversely during a time interval when House Finches were increasing and a time interval when House Finches were decreasing. In the second analysis, we found that the rates of geometric change in House Sparrow abundance (ln[HOSP(t+1)/HOSP(t)]) were negatively correlated with initial House Finch (HOFI(t)) and sparrow (HOSP(t)) abundances at individual sites, irrespective of the time period. Given that finch range expansion and subsequent declines in abundance are the result of two very different phenomena, it would be very unlikely for apparent competition or spurious correlations to cause the observed concomitant changes in House Sparrow abundance. We conclude that interspecific competition exists between these two species.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17536703     DOI: 10.1890/06-0855

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecology        ISSN: 0012-9658            Impact factor:   5.499


  6 in total

1.  DIFFERENTIAL IMPACT OF WEST NILE VIRUS ON CALIFORNIA BIRDS.

Authors:  Sarah S Wheeler; Christopher M Barker; Ying Fang; M Veronica Armijos; Brian D Carroll; Stan Husted; Wesley O Johnson; William K Reisen
Journal:  Condor       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.135

Review 2.  The ecology of emerging infectious diseases in migratory birds: an assessment of the role of climate change and priorities for future research.

Authors:  Trevon Fuller; Staffan Bensch; Inge Müller; John Novembre; Javier Pérez-Tris; Robert E Ricklefs; Thomas B Smith; Jonas Waldenström
Journal:  Ecohealth       Date:  2012-02-25       Impact factor: 3.184

3.  A new hammer to crack an old nut: interspecific competitive resource capture by plants is regulated by nutrient supply, not climate.

Authors:  Clare J Trinder; Rob W Brooker; Hazel Davidson; David Robinson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Is it benign or is it a Pariah? Empirical evidence for the impact of the common Myna (Acridotheres tristis) on Australian birds.

Authors:  Kate Grarock; Christopher R Tidemann; Jeffrey Wood; David B Lindenmayer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-07-11       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Observer aging and long-term avian survey data quality.

Authors:  Robert G Farmer; Marty L Leonard; Joanna E Mills Flemming; Sean C Anderson
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2014-05-26       Impact factor: 2.912

6.  This town ain't big enough for both of us…or is it? Spatial co-occurrence between exotic and native species in an urban reserve.

Authors:  Gonzalo A Ramírez-Cruz; Israel Solano-Zavaleta; Pedro E Mendoza-Hernández; Marcela Méndez-Janovitz; Monserrat Suárez-Rodríguez; J Jaime Zúñiga-Vega
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.